Karnataka High Court
Sri Sharanappa S/O Manappa Itagi vs Sri Shanthal S/O Lakshaman And Anr on 23 June, 2025
Author: Ravi V Hosmani
Bench: Ravi V Hosmani
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3318
MFA No. 200127 of 2021
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JUNE, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.200127 OF 2021 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
SRI SHARANAPPA S/O MANAPPA ITAGI,
AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE WORK,
R/O: MUDBOOL VILLAGE,
TQ: SHAHAPUR, DIST: KALABURAGI,
PRESENTLY R/O: MANDEWAL VILLAGE,
TQ: JEWARGI, DIST: KALABURAGI.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI SHARANABASAPPA K.BABSHETTY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI SHANTHAL S/O LAKSHAMAN,
AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: OWNER OF THE LORRY,
R/O: DANNUR (S), THANDA,
TQ: BHALKI, DIST: BIDAR - 585 328.
Digitally signed
by RAMESH 2. LEGAL MANAGER,
MATHAPATI
TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF II FLOOR, JP AND DEVI JEMBUKESHWAR ARCADE NO.69
KARNATAKA MILLERS, ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. PREETI PATIL MELKUNDI, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT,
PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND
AWARD DATED 22.11.2018, PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE
AND JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF THE FIRST CLASS AT JEWARGI, IN
MVC NO.103/2016 AND ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT AS
CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND
EQUITY.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3318
MFA No. 200127 of 2021
HC-KAR
THIS MFA, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT
WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI
ORAL JUDGMENT
Challenging judgment and award dated 22.11.2018
passed by Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Jewargi, in MVC
no.103/2016, appeal is filed.
2. Sri Sharanabasappa K.Babshetty, learned counsel
submitted appeal was by claimant for enhancement of
compensation. It was submitted on 08.04.2015, when claimant
was riding motorcycle bearing registration no.KA-33/J-3112 on
Shahapura-Kalaburagi main road, at about 4.30 p.m., near
Madraki cross, driver of lorry bearing registration no.MH-25/B-
9881, drove it in rash and negligent manner and in process of
overtaking another vehicle, it turtled. Sugar cane loaded in
lorry fell on claimant, due to which he sustained fracture of
distal end of left tibia and other injuries. Despite taking
treatment at Kamareddy Hospital, Kalaburagi, he did not
recover fully and sustained permanent physical disability/loss of
earning capacity. Therefore, he filed claim petition under
Section 166 of M.V.Act, against owner and insurer of offending
lorry.
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3318
HC-KAR
3. On contest, wherein claim petition was opposed on
all grounds including denial of age, occupation, income,
disability as well as allegation of violation of terms and
conditions of policy.
4. Based on pleadings, tribunal framed issues and
recorded evidence, wherein claimant examined himself as PW.1
and got marked Exs.P.1 to P.41. Respondents did not lead any
evidence.
5. On consideration, Tribunal held accident had
occurred due to rash and negligent driving of insured vehicle by
its driver, claimant had sustained injuries, permanent physical
disability and consequent loss of earning capacity and therefore
entitled for compensation. It held insurer was liable to pay
compensation and assessed as follows:
Sl.No. Heads Amount
1 Towards medical expenses Rs.55,000/-
2 Loss of income during treatment Rs.10,000/-
3 Pain and suffering Rs.20,000/-
4 Food, conveyance and attendant Rs.10,000/-
charges during treatment and laid off
period
Total Rs.95,000/-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3318
HC-KAR
6. Dissatisfied with same, claimant was in appeal.
7. It was submitted claimant sustained displaced
fracture of distal end of left tibia. However, tribunal awarded
meager compensation towards pain and suffering. It was
submitted, it also awarded only Rs.10,000/- towards loss of
income during laid up period and not awarded any
compensation towards future medical expenses even though
implants were required to be removed. It was submitted
though claimant had produced wound certificate, discharge
summary, medical prescriptions, bills, X-ray films and disability
certificate as Exs.P4, P7 to P41 respectively, tribunal did not
award compensation towards loss future of income merely on
ground of non-examination of doctor. On said grounds sought
enhancement.
8. On other hand, Smt.Preeti Patil Melkundi, learned
counsel for respondent no.2-insurer opposed appeal. It was
submitted tribunal had taken note of entire material and
awarded just compensation under respective heads leaving no
scope for enhancement and prayed for dismissal.
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3318
HC-KAR
9. Heard learned counsel, perused impugned
judgment and award.
10. From above, it is seen this appeal is by claimant for
enhancement of compensation and insurer has not preferred
appeal, point that would arise for consideration is:
"Whether claimant is entitled for enhancement of
compensation as prayed for?
11. From above, findings of tribunal regarding
occurrence of accident due to rash and negligent driving of
insured vehicle by its driver, claimant sustaining permanent
physical disability and insurer being liable to pay compensation
are not in dispute.
12. Insofar as first contention, indeed claimant has
sustained displaced fracture of distal end of left tibia which
would be major fracture, for which Rs.25,000/- is prescribed,
same is awarded.
13. Normally, fractures take about three months to
heal, same has to be considered as period of lay-off. Accident
occurred in year 2015, notional income for said period is
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3318
HC-KAR
Rs.8,000/-. Thus, claimant would be entitled to compensation
of Rs.24,000/- towards loss of income during laid up period.
14. As per medical records available, there are implants
in situ. For their removal claimant has to undergo one more
surgery. Therefore, Rs.25,000/- is awarded towards future
medical expenses.
15. Tribunal has awarded Rs.55,000/- towards medical
expenses in complete re-imbursement of medical bills. Same
would not invite any enhancement.
16. It is seen tribunal believed and relied on medical
records while awarding compensation. When injuries and
treatment taken are not disputed, merely on ground that doctor
has not examined, tribunal would not be justified in denying
compensation towards loss of future income. Taking note of
contents of Ex.P4-wound certificate, Ex.P7-discharge summary
and Ex.P41-disability certificate, wherein disability of 29% is
assessed, it would be safe to consider 7% notionally as
functional disability. Since claimant was 25 years of age,
multiplier applicable would be 18. Thus, compensation towards
loss of future income would be:
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3318
HC-KAR
Rs.8,000/- x 7% x 12 x 18 = Rs.1,20,960/-.
17. Therefore, total compensation would be as follows:
Sl.No. Heads Amount
1 Towards medical expenses Rs.55,000/-
2 Loss of income during treatment Rs.24,000/-
3 Pain and suffering Rs.25,000/-
4 Food, conveyance and attendant Rs.10,000/-
charges during treatment
5 Towards future medical expenses Rs.25,000/-
6 Towards loss of future income Rs.1,20,960/-
Total Rs.2,59,960/-
Rounded off Rs.2,60,000/-
18. In view of above, point for consideration is
answered partly in affirmative. Consequently, following:
ORDER
i. Appeal is allowed in part.
ii. Judgment and award dated 22.11.2018 passed by
Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Jewargi, in MVC
no.103/2016, is modified.
iii. Claimant is held entitled for re-assessed
compensation of Rs.2,60,000/- as against
Rs.95,000/- awarded by Tribunal with interest at
6% per annum from date of claim petition till
deposit.
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3318
HC-KAR
iv. Respondent-insurer to deposit same before Tribunal
within a period of six weeks.
v. On deposit, conditions imposed above, deposit and
released shall apply to enhanced compensation
proportionately.
Sd/-
(RAVI V HOSMANI)
JUDGE
MSR
